At the end of Sect.  we already discussed the energy dependence of the handbag approach.
As we mentioned in Sec. , in the range of \(s\)  we are interested in, our cross section effectively
behaves \(\propto s^{-9}\)  in the region of twist-3 dominance. This is perhaps somewhat too strong.
Since our form factors represent \(1/x\) -moments of GPDs they evolve with the scale in principle.
Because of the strong \(x-t\)  correlation the form factors at large \(-t\)  are under control of a narrow
region of large \(x\) . With increasing \(-t\)  the affected region approaches 1 and becomes narrower. Therefore,
our form factors approximately become equal to the scale-independent lowest moments of the GPDs concerned.
Thus, as it is argued in [1]}, the \(1/x\) -factors in the form factors can be viewed as a
phenomenological estimate of effects beyond the strict \(\Lambda /\sqrt{-t}\)  expansion (see
Sect. ). One may likewise argue that the disregard of the scale-dependence of the
form factors also requires the neglect of the evolution of the DAs for consistency. Thus,
as already discussed in [2]}, we also evaluate the photoproduction cross sections at the fixed scale
of \(\mu _R=\mu _F=1\,\,{\rm GeV}\)  as an alternative and fit the coefficient \(\omega _{20}\)  to the CLAS and SLAC data.
This procedure hardly alters the size and shape of the cross sections but reduces their effective energy
dependence to about \(s^{-8}\)  in regions of twist-3 dominance. The results we obtain
with \(\omega _{20}(\mu _0)=10.3\)  are shown as dashed lines in Figs. REF 
and REF . They agree fairly well with the data.
